Committee chairs responsibilities

[lipets]

Our club nominated a new committee of 7 people.

So were ready to start the assigned task and the chair is instructing us what we can publicly say with stated examples of text.

Also telling us we can't discuss what we do with the members.

Terms of the committee does not address that at all.

Is the chair wrong to try and control us.

2 folks are ready to quit.

[Larry Cisar]

Ask the chair what gives him the authority to make such declarations and to show you the pages.

[Rob Elsman]

Our club nominated a new committee of 7 people.

So were ready to start the assigned task and the chair is instructing us what we can publicly say with stated examples of text.

Also telling us we can't discuss what we do with the members.

Terms of the committee does not address that at all.

Is the chair wrong to try and control us.

2 folks are ready to quit.

Committee members must not discuss the committee's deliberations outside the committee's meetings, except for what is contained in the committee's reports to the parent body. Other than that, being a member of a committee does not restrict a member of a society in any way.

[lipets]

Committee members must not discuss the committee's deliberations outside the committee's meetings, except for what is contained in the committee's reports to the parent body.

Of course agree

Other than that, being a member of a committee does not restrict a member of a society in any way.

anything to cite?

Here's the issue I want ask members what their opinions/suggestions are on what changes they wish to see the club make.

I'm told just say "thank you" don't go into any further discussion, I think that is waaay over reaching.

J

[Rob Elsman]

Of course agree

anything to cite?

Here's the issue I want ask members what their opinions/suggestions are on what changes they wish to see the club make.

I'm told just say "thank you" don't go into any further discussion, I think that is waaay over reaching.

J

Take a look at the discussion on executive session, RONR (10th ed.), pp. 92, 93.

You're in the clear asking society members what changes they wish to see the club make, as these kinds of questions and suggestions are not part of the committee's deliberations; rather, they are your private conversations with society members.

[lipets]

Take a look at the discussion on executive session, RONR (10th ed.), pp. 92, 93.

You're in the clear asking society members what changes they wish to see the club make, as these kinds of questions and suggestions are not part of the committee's deliberations; rather, they are your private conversations with society members.

Thanks for confirming what I thought.

[Josh Martin]

Committee members must not discuss the committee's deliberations outside the committee's meetings, except for what is contained in the committee's reports to the parent body. Other than that, being a member of a committee does not restrict a member of a society in any way.

Well, if the committee meets in executive session. I'm aware that RONR says that committees customarily meet in executive session, but I think that's more of an observation than a rule.

[Tim Wynn]

Well, if the committee meets in executive session. I'm aware that RONR says that committees customarily meet in executive session, but I think that's more of an observation than a rule.

I concur.

[Rob Elsman]

Well, if the committee meets in executive session. I'm aware that RONR says that committees customarily meet in executive session, but I think that's more of an observation than a rule.

While committees sometimes hold open hearings, the deliberations of the committee are regularly held in secret. Take a look at RONR (10th ed.), p. 483, ll. 35-36.

[hmtcastle]

Take a look at RONR (10th ed.), p. 483, ll. 35-36.

That merely states that only members of the committee have a right to attend committee meetings. It doesn't prevent the committee from inviting non-members and it says nothing about executive sessions.

[Rob Elsman]

That merely states that only members of the committee have a right to attend committee meetings. It doesn't prevent the committee from inviting non-members and it says nothing about executive sessions.

I've reexamined the cited texts, and I confirm my earlier opinion.

[hmtcastle]

I've reexamined the cited texts, and I confirm my earlier opinion.

Isn't that something like nominating yourself?

[Rob Elsman]

Isn't that something like nominating yourself?

No. I did not nominate myself.

[Tim Wynn]

I've reexamined the cited texts, and I confirm my earlier opinion.

Take another shot at it. It says only members have the right to attend. That doesn't mean or imply executive session... just the way only members having the right to vote doesn't imply a secret ballot. (If this has gotten twisted into a debate over an "open meeting," I was unaware of that.)

[Rob Elsman]

Take another shot at it. It says only members have the right to attend. That doesn't mean or imply executive session... just the way only members having the right to vote doesn't imply a secret ballot. (If this has gotten twisted into a debate over an "open meeting," I was unaware of that.)

I've taken another shot, and I reconfirm my previous opinion.

[Guest Nancy N.]

Under the circumstances, now, repeated voting will be unavailing, since Mr. Elsman is outvoting the rest of you; so as I chime in with my vote supporting the opinions of Tim, Josh, and Mr. Mt, we will simply see Rob cast another vote for his opinion again.

So we'll concede that this is an issue that Rob has already won, by dint of his superior numbers. What should be made clear, first, is that, whether the committee meets in confidential deliberations -- or allows non-committee members to know what was done in the committee meeting and even what was said, is not the committee chairman's decision to make. It's the decision of the committee's membership, or maybe what the parent society tells the committee.

[hmtcastle]

Under the circumstances, now, repeated voting will be unavailing, since Mr. Elsman is outvoting the rest of you; so as I chime in with my vote supporting the opinions of Tim, Josh, and Mr. Mt, we will simply see Rob cast another vote for his opinion again.

I recommend the following observation by (fictional) detective Nero Wolfe:

"I love to make a mistake. It is my only assurance that I cannot reasonably be expected to assume the burden of omniscience."

[Trina]

Our club nominated a new committee of 7 people.

So were ready to start the assigned task and the chair is instructing us what we can publicly say....

Is the chair wrong to try and control us.

Under the circumstances, now, repeated voting will be unavailing, since Mr. Elsman is outvoting the rest of you; so as I chime in with my vote supporting the opinions of Tim, Josh, and Mr. Mt, we will simply see Rob cast another vote for his opinion again.

So we'll concede that this is an issue that Rob has already won, by dint of his superior numbers. What should be made clear, first, is that, whether the committee meets in confidential deliberations -- or allows non-committee members to know what was done in the committee meeting and even what was said, is not the committee chairman's decision to make. It's the decision of the committee's membership, or maybe what the parent society tells the committee.

That looks like the salient question and answer.

I don't see how the cited texts (pp. 92-93, and the bottom of p. 483) can be read as requiring a committee to meet in executive session. The chair in JIMBO2010's committee isn't trying to educate the committee members about a rule from RONR; he is simply trying to impose his personal opinion on the members of the committee by 'instructing' them.

[Tim Wynn]

Finally, two voices of reason swoop in and get to the point, while the rest of us are busy trying to hold Rob at bay. Thanks Nancy and Trina.

[lipets]

That looks like the salient question and answer.

I don't see how the cited texts (pp. 92-93, and the bottom of p. 483) can be read as requiring a committee to meet in executive session. The chair in JIMBO2010's committee isn't trying to educate the committee members about a rule from RONR; he is simply trying to impose his personal opinion on the members of the committee by 'instructing' them.

I read it not as opinion by the chair but as a clear directive or order?

Since I posted this 2 others on the committee have a problem with also.

We meet next week, so anything you folks think we lend to this issue is welcome.

J

[Josh Martin]

I read it not as opinion by the chair but as a clear directive or order?

It's the committee that gives the chair clear directives or orders, not the other way around.

[lipets]

It's the committee that gives the chair clear directives or orders, not the other way around.

Josh, is there a rule or cite on that I see myself making an issue of this.

[Josh Martin]

Josh, is there a rule or cite on that I see myself making an issue of this.

Why don't you ask your chair to cite the rule that says the chair can tell members of the committee what to do?

I suppose take a look at pgs. 1-5, which are about the basic principles of a deliberative assembly. You'll note there's a lot in there about majority vote and not much about the chair being a dictator.

[lipets]

Why don't you ask your chair to cite the rule that says the chair can tell members of the committee what to do?

I suppose take a look at pgs. 1-5, which are about the basic principles of a deliberative assembly. You'll note there's a lot in there about majority vote and not much about the chair being a dictator.

As such us committee can set the agenda for what we review change etc..

I'll take a look 1-5 also

thanks

Jim

[hmtcastle]

Josh, is there a rule or cite on that I see myself making an issue of this.

The rule is that the chair, like any other member, has just one vote.

Perhaps the gavel has gone to his head? (Cue "Maxwell's Silver Hammer".)